2016 (2) TMI 638 - AT - Central Excise

Denial of benefit of CENVAT Credit on Xerox copy of courier bill of entry - Held that - There is no dispute that the material on which the credit has been taken was imported by the appellant and was used for manufacturing of the product. The objection of the department is that the appellants have not produced the original bill of entry and the photocopy of the courier bill of entry or consolidated courier bill of entry is not admissible for denying credit under Rule 9. Thus hold that the appellant have correctly claimed the CENVAT Credit on the photocopy of the courier bill of entry filed by them and CENVAT Credit cannot be denied on mere technical grounds. - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues:
Denial of CENVAT Credit on Xerox copy of courier bill of entry.

Analysis:
The appeal challenged the Order-in-Appeal denying CENVAT Credit on a courier bill of entry for imported inputs. An audit revealed the appellant wrongly availed CENVAT Credit, leading to payment of dues and subsequent issuance of a show-cause notice. The AC confirmed the demand, upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals), prompting the appellant's appeal.

The appellant argued the validity of a courier bill of entry under the Bill of Entry Regulation and Courier Imports and Exports Clearance Regulation. They contended actual receipt and utilization of imported inputs in manufacturing final products, citing precedents like Tecumseh Products India P. Ltd. (2008) and Controls & Devices Coimbatore P. Ltd. (2008). The AR supported the lower authorities' findings.

The Tribunal deliberated on the courier bill of entry's eligibility for CENVAT Credit under Rule 9 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Referencing the cited judgments, the Tribunal found the appellant's case aligned with the precedents, leading to the appeal's allowance and the impugned order's setting aside with possible consequential relief.

The judgment, pronounced on 8/1/2016 by S. S. Garg, Member (J) of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai, resolved the issue by upholding the appellant's claim for CENVAT Credit based on the validity of the courier bill of entry, as supported by relevant regulations and legal precedents.